CIT v. Sudhir Choudhrie

TERAS STEELS PRIVATE LIMITED (EARLIER KNOWN AS M/S. ACCIL STEELS PVT. LTD.),NEW DELHI vs. DCIT CENTRAL CIRCLE-29, NEW DELHI

In the result, all captioned appeals/Cross-Objections etc

Bench: Shri Pradip Kumar Kedia & Shri Sudhir Kumar

…in vs Pr.CIT (Central-III), New Delhi & Anr.(2018) 406 ITR 328 (Del). The Hon’ble Delhi High took cognizance of Full Bench Judgment in the case of CIT vs Odeon Builders (P.) Ltd. 393 ITR 27 (Delhi) and that of division bench in CIT vs. Sudhir Choudhrie (2005) 278 ITR 490 (Delhi) and observed in unequivocal terms that once the order is listed for pronouncement in the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, the department representative or the Commissioner of Income Tax (Judicial) should be taken to be aware of the order. From that point, it is a purely internal administrative arrangement as to how the Departmental represen…

QUALCOMM INCORPORATED,USA vs. DCIT, CIRCLE- 3(1)(1), INTL. TAXATION, NEW DELHI

Bench: Shri N.K. Billaiya & Shri Sudhanshu Srivastava

…f the ITAT have the effect of postponing the time, from which limitation would begin to run in terms of Section 260 A (2) (a) of the Act, to when such CIT receives the order of the ITAT? (iv) After the decision of this Court in CIT v. Sudhir Choudhrie (2005) 278 ITR 490, do the decisions in CIT v. Arvind Construction Co. (P.) Ltd. (1992) 193 ITR 330 and CIT v. ITAT (2000) 245 ITR 659 (Del) require to be reconsidered, explained or reconciled? (v) After the change of procedure where orders of the ITAT are pronounced in the open, is it incumbent on the Department through its DR or CIT (Judicial) to apply for a cer…

QUALCOMM INCORPORATED,USA vs. DCIT, CIRCLE- 3(1)(1), INTL. TAXATION, NEW DELHI

Bench: Shri N.K. Billaiya & Shri Sudhanshu Srivastava

…f the ITAT have the effect of postponing the time, from which limitation would begin to run in terms of Section 260 A (2) (a) of the Act, to when such CIT receives the order of the ITAT? (iv) After the decision of this Court in CIT v. Sudhir Choudhrie (2005) 278 ITR 490, do the decisions in CIT v. Arvind Construction Co. (P.) Ltd. (1992) 193 ITR 330 and CIT v. ITAT (2000) 245 ITR 659 (Del) require to be reconsidered, explained or reconciled? (v) After the change of procedure where orders of the ITAT are pronounced in the open, is it incumbent on the Department through its DR or CIT (Judicial) to apply for a cer…

QUALCOMM INCORPORATED,USA vs. DCIT, CIRCLE- 3(1)(1), INTL. TAXATION, NEW DELHI

Bench: Shri N.K. Billaiya & Shri Sudhanshu Srivastava

…f the ITAT have the effect of postponing the time, from which limitation would begin to run in terms of Section 260 A (2) (a) of the Act, to when such CIT receives the order of the ITAT? (iv) After the decision of this Court in CIT v. Sudhir Choudhrie (2005) 278 ITR 490, do the decisions in CIT v. Arvind Construction Co. (P.) Ltd. (1992) 193 ITR 330 and CIT v. ITAT (2000) 245 ITR 659 (Del) require to be reconsidered, explained or reconciled? (v) After the change of procedure where orders of the ITAT are pronounced in the open, is it incumbent on the Department through its DR or CIT (Judicial) to apply for a cer…

QUALCOMM INCORPORATED,HYDERABAD vs. DCIT, CIRCLE- 3(1)(1), INTERNATIONAL TAXATION, NEW DELHI

Bench: Shri N.K. Billaiya & Shri Sudhanshu Srivastava

…f the ITAT have the effect of postponing the time, from which limitation would begin to run in terms of Section 260 A (2) (a) of the Act, to when such CIT receives the order of the ITAT? (iv) After the decision of this Court in CIT v. Sudhir Choudhrie (2005) 278 ITR 490, do the decisions in CIT v. Arvind Construction Co. (P.) Ltd. (1992) 193 ITR 330 and CIT v. ITAT (2000) 245 ITR 659 (Del) require to be reconsidered, explained or reconciled? (v) After the change of procedure where orders of the ITAT are pronounced in the open, is it incumbent on the Department through its DR or CIT (Judicial) to apply for a cer…

COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX vs. M/S INTERNATIONAL TRACTOR LTD.

Bench: The Said Date?”

…of law in these appeals. The order of 04.05.2017 noticed that the requirement ITA No.497/2004 Page 3 of pronouncing the judgment in open court as it were, did not exist before the judgment in Commissioner of Income Tax v. Sudhir Choudhrie (2005) 278 ITR 490 (Del). As a result of that judgment, Rule 34 was inserted in the ITAT Rules to facilitate that procedure. The Court, in its order of 04.05.2017 noticed and held that since the change of Rule was prospective, there was no illegality – to an order on account of signature of Shri Ram Bahadur on 01.03.2004 even though its author had signed…

COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX vs. M/S INTERNATIONAL TRACTOR LTD.

Bench: The Said Date?”

…appeals. The order of 04.05.2017 noticed that the requirement 2017:DHC:7378-DB ITA No.497/2004 Page 3 of pronouncing the judgment in open court as it were, did not exist before the judgment in Commissioner of Income Tax v. Sudhir Choudhrie (2005) 278 ITR 490 (Del). As a result of that judgment, Rule 34 was inserted in the ITAT Rules to facilitate that procedure. The Court, in its order of 04.05.2017 noticed and held that since the change of Rule was prospective, there was no illegality – to an order on account of signature of Shri Ram Bahadur on 01.03.2004 even though its author had signed…